Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?

Comments

lol, I was thinking more like July for your road trip. They've been without power in parts of the province for almost two weeks and now they're getting hammered by rain and high winds. Did I post pics the other day? Now that's weather! (ctvnews.com)

I have opened doors to be faced with a wall of blown in snow. Kind of creepy not knowing how far you have to dig to get out of your building. If I sell out here and move East I will have more time for trips like that. That is a long ways up there to L'Anse aux Meadows. I'd rather go to Belize or Costa Rica before they are under water They are starting another ferry system from Tampa to Cancun. Make the drive to Belize and Costa Rica much shorter and safer.

My van's been there twice, fun trip, lots of ice bergs. In your case, south may be the better idea since diesel is widely available down that way. The ferry sounds like fun, may have to check that out (I assume walk-ons are okay). Also sounds like they start one every 5 years and they don't pan out.

@Stever@Edmunds said:
"Merely been associated with". Mann was a lead author on the “Observed Climate Variability and Change” chapter of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Scientific Assessment Report. The group that won the prize.

I wondered why I was shut out and just went to harrassing Rocky on his FB page. Speaking of pollution, I wonder if the Atlantic will be safer than the Pacific since Fukishima. Man Made pollution is real. My kids are worried about their water supply coming out of the Ohio River. I think there are so many more pressing environmental issues than GW.

There's a way to verify people so the system won't flag posts, so that should fix the issue with you.

The Atlantic has its own issues with the Italian mob illegally dumping radioactive waste offshore but most of the waste was dumped legally by the UK. (BBC)

And the US dumped in the Atlantic too, and there's some in the Gulf of Mexico. (Wikipedia)

There's some argument that radioactive waste doesn't really dilute but simply gets spread further around (it's "diluted" but the argument is that if you happen to ingest any particles that wind up on your lettuce, your cancer risk increases). The real dilution is the half-life, and that can be very short to 24,000 years for a high level waste like Plutonium-239. Don't ask me which ones got dumped by Fukushima; there are lots and lots of different kinds of radioactive waste.

The nuke stuff is even more difficult to get your head around that all the GW papers. And the people who know the stuff are mostly in the industry so the whole trust issue boils down to believing GE or Greenpeace.

Btw, had king crab last week and some pacific haddock. But freshwater perch last night.

I think that bad stuff from Fukishima is Cesium 134 & 137. Of course our communist friends in the Soviet Union dumped 100s of tons of nuclear waste in the World's oceans. One account when the cannisters did not sink they punctured them so they filled with water and sunk. That was off the coast of Norway. I guess my concern is what is going on NOW and not so much about theories of what may happen 100 years from now. Not to mention that the whole GW scam is really just corporate welfare. Take cash from GM and give to Tesla kind of thing.

Boise and Vermont in the path of Fukishima radiation??

The cesium-137 found in milk in Vermont is the first cesium detected in milk since the Fukushima-Daichi nuclear accident occurred last month. The sample contained 1.9 picoCuries per liter of cesium-137, which falls under the same 3.0 standard.

Radioactive isotopes accumulate in milk after they spread through the atmosphere, fall to earth in rain or dust, and settle on vegetation, where they are ingested by grazing cattle. Iodine-131 is known to accumulate in the thyroid gland, where it can cause cancer and other thyroid diseases. Cesium-137 accumulates in the body’s soft tissues, where it increases risk of cancer, according to EPA.

Airborne contamination continues to cross the western states, the new data shows, and Boise has seen the highest concentrations of radioactive isotopes in rain so far.

Many would say Sweden has picked all three forms of generation poorly. Hydro and Nukes are on the Eco outs. Wind killing off eagles and bats are not so good. They make a big deal of their wind yet it is only 8% of their energy production. Nice they have excess to sell.

I think Clean Coal supported by Obama is the best route for the USA.

Obama has spent more than $1 billion on carbon-capture projects tied to oil fields and has pledged billions more for clean coal. Recently, the administration said it wanted to require all new coal-fired power plants to capture carbon dioxide. Four power plants in the U.S. and Canada planning to do so intend to sell their carbon waste for oil recovery.

Heh, could have sworn the NPR blurb I heard this morning said wind was almost 60% of Sweden's electrical production. Gotta start reading my own links lol. And not rely on my hearing before my 3rd cup of coffee.

The nuke stuff is even more difficult to get your head around that all the GW papers.

Speaking of the nuke stuff, I am also confused. The radioactivity is supposed to last thousands of years and render any area unusable. But we all know that Hiroshima was nuked only about 67 years ago, and now it is a thriving city and has been for some time. And all the people seem to be doing just fine. Same with Nagasaki.

One of the "anti" sites I skimmed a couple of weeks ago made a big deal about the post-Hiroshima cancer studies and how they cherry picked* the data to skew the results. I think they mean the joint study that doesn't look at exposure prior to 1958. Beats me. (rerf.jp)

Why is it when one eagle or spotted owl get killed by a person, the Sierra and Greenpeace wackos go into a week-long tizzy (getting much help from the mainstream media, yet it seems that these giant wind turbines are killing birds by the 1000s and nobody cares...plus, wasn't it Ted Kennedy, when alive, who did not want wind turbines placed 6 MILES of the coast of Hyannisport, because it MIGHT interfere with his view while boating on his yacht (he couldn't change course by 15 degrees and simply not look?)...

Enviro-wackos are a most hypocritical bunch...at least from what I read...

@marsha7 said:
Why is it when one eagle or spotted owl get killed by a person, the Sierra and Greenpeace wackos go into a week-long tizzy (getting much help from the mainstream media, yet it seems that these giant wind turbines are killing birds by the 1000s and nobody cares...plus, wasn't it Ted Kennedy, when alive, who did not want wind turbines placed 6 MILES of the coast of Hyannisport, because it MIGHT interfere with his view while boating on his yacht (he couldn't change course by 15 degrees and simply not look?)...

Enviro-wackos are a most hypocritical bunch...at least from what I read...

It is even worse than that. Obama signed a waiver giving Wind Farms a free ride on killing Eagles. All under the guise of fighting GW.

Sen. Ted Kennedy and many residents who own coastal property from where they could see the wind turbines on a clear day oppose the project along with some environmental groups concerned about disrupting the patterns of migratory birds and the potential effect on local sea life.

Good riddance to bad science. Maybe now we can start addressing the REAL problems mankind faces.

The EU's reputation as a model of environmental responsibility may soon be history. The European Commission wants to forgo ambitious climate protection goals and pave the way for fracking -- jeopardizing Germany's touted energy revolution in the process. The climate between Brussels and Berlin is polluted, something European Commission officials attribute, among other things, to the "reckless" way German Chancellor Angela Merkel blocked stricter exhaust emissions during her re-election campaign to placate domestic automotive manufacturers like Daimler and BMW. This kind of blatant self-interest, officials complained at the time, is poisoning the climate.

At the request of Commission President José Manuel Barroso, EU member states are no longer to receive specific guidelines for the development ofrenewable energy. The stated aim of increasing the share of green energy across the EU to up to 27 percent will hold. But how seriously countries tackle this project will no longer be regulated within the plan. As of 2020 at the latest -- when the current commitment to further increase the share of green energy expires -- climate protection in the EU will apparently be pursued on a voluntary basis.

@gagrice, here's a good one for you. Even if you don't read the article (which doesn't mention AGW), be sure you click through to the photo from Big Lake that accompanies the story.

"It was another notable year for all-time heat records in 2013, with six nations and three territories tying or setting records for hottest temperature on record. No nations set an all-time cold record in 2013. For comparison, five countries and two territories set all-time hottest temperature records in 2012, and the most all-time national heat records in a year was twenty nations and one territory in 2010. Since 2010, 45 nations or territories have set or tied all-time heat records, but only one nation has set an all-time cold temperature record." (wunderground.com)

Weather Underground is a site that is always up on my computer. Do I believe what they post for my area? Not a chance. How do we know these temps are true and accurate. With the people recording the data being part of the political agenda. You cannot trust them. They question the 1913 Death Valley records. So why is it not reasonable to question the data we are being told today? I know their equipment in my area is sending them false data. How many thousands of sites are improperly located? As far as the Alaska data, I am sure the interior around Fairbanks has had 100+ days. 98 degrees at Fort Rich would be hot.

That said we are having some of the strangest weather this year I can remember. The last 3 weeks it has not gone below 50 degrees at night. It has also not gone over 73 degrees during the day. Out in the sun yes it has been hot. That is not ambient temperature. Yet Weather Underground has supposedly recorded several days over 80. I just don't trust anything the NWS says. They are paid to lie to US. Anyone goes against the agenda gets drummed out.

Not being able to tell the truth seems to be a big problem for the GW folks. They just seem to have to lie, embellish, and/or hide facts and data. I don't think many people take them seriously at this point. Once you become a convicted liar the game is over in my book.

The bays "typically" freeze (and some of the bays are big). Right now the snow berms along the shore road are so high I can't see the lake. We're into tunnel vision mode. Ordinarily I can see Canada from my house.

Usually we can find a snowmachine track to gain access to the beach for walking but haven't seen any this year. Anyway, the shore ice varies depending on the wind; my guess is that it varies from ~15 feet to a quarter mile. "Total" freezing happens about once a decade but the definition of frozen over isn't solid. (climate.umn.edu)

And there's this - "Even solar activity, which waxes and wanes on fairly regular 11-year cycles, has been found to play a rather minimal role in recent global warming." (discovery.com). I found the recent el Niño stories interesting, for example. (natureworldnews.com)

Why don't they just kill off the last 8 and make some nice parkas to sell at the gift shop. Or stop wasting money and trap and drop some new blood into the line. Maybe they ate all the available food. I think this answers the question more than the above article.

The ecological study of wolves on Isle Royale is the longest running large mammal predator-prey study on earth. The park celebrated the study's 50th anniversary in 2008. Research has show that all members of the Isle Royale wolf population have descended from a single female, who arrived during the late 1940s. This intense level of inbreeding has led to a 50 % loss of genetic variability within the population today. Genetic information also suggest that the island's moose population is most closely related to moose in northwestern Minnesota, perhaps challenging the long-held idea that moose swam across the lake to reach Isle Royale. Did humans bring them here?

@gagrice, I think that hands off approach is a big part of the study and lots of the biologists don't want to "interfere".

"Tens of thousands of black brant geese now flock to the Arctic coast to munch marsh-loving vegetation growing along shorelines of thawed permafrost no longer safeguarded from saltwater storm surges by sea ice, according to new U.S. Geological Survey research announced Tuesday."